
==== Front
F1000Res
F1000Res
F1000Research
2046-1402
F1000 Research Limited London, UK

10.12688/f1000research.146327.1
Software Tool Article
Articles
Spot Spine, a freely available ImageJ plugin for 3D detection and morphological analysis of dendritic spines
[version 1; peer review: 1 approved

Gilles Jean-Francois Conceptualization Data Curation Investigation Methodology Resources Software Validation Writing – Review & Editing 1
Mailly Philippe Conceptualization Investigation Methodology Software 2
Ferreira Tiago Investigation Methodology Software Validation Writing – Review & Editing 3
Boudier Thomas Conceptualization Investigation Methodology Software Validation Writing – Review & Editing 4
Heck Nicolas Conceptualization Data Curation Funding Acquisition Investigation Methodology Project Administration Resources Software Supervision Validation Visualization Writing – Original Draft Preparation Writing – Review & Editing https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3116-7685
a5
1 Institut de Biologie Paris Seine, CNRS, Sorbonne Universite, Paris, Île-de-France, France
2 CRIB, CNRS, College de France, Paris, Île-de-France, France
3 Howard Hughes Medical Institute Janelia Farm Research Campus, Ashburn, Virginia, USA
4 INRIA, CNRS, Ecole Centrale Méditerranée, University of Côte d'Azur, Nice, Provence-Alpes-Côte d'Azur, France
5 Neuroscience Paris Seine, CNRS, Sorbonne Universite, Paris, Île-de-France, France
a nicolas.heck@sorbonne-universite.fr
No competing interests were disclosed.

11 3 2024
2024
13 17626 2 2024
Copyright: © 2024 Gilles JF et al.
2024
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licence, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Background

Dendritic spines are tiny protrusions found along the dendrites of neurons, and their number is a measure of the density of synaptic connections. Altered density and morphology is observed in several pathologies, and spine formation as well as morphological changes correlate with learning and memory. The detection of spines in microscopy images and the analysis of their morphology is therefore a prerequisite for many studies. We have developed a new open-source, freely available, plugin for ImageJ/FIJI, called Spot Spine, that allows detection and morphological measurements of spines in three dimensional images.

Method

Local maxima are detected in spine heads, and the intensity distribution around the local maximum is computed to perform the segmentation of each spine head. Spine necks are then traced from the spine head to the dendrite. Several parameters can be set to optimize detection and segmentation, and manual correction gives further control over the result of the process.

Results

The plugin allows the analysis of images of dendrites obtained with various labeling and imaging methods. Quantitative measurements are retrieved including spine head volume and surface, and neck length.

Conclusion

The plugin and instructions for use are available at https://imagej.net/plugins/spot-spine.

Dendritic spine
neuronal morphology
neuroanatomy
synapse
image analysis
ImageJ
Fiji
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS), Sorbonne Université and Institut pour la Recherche en Santé Publique (IReSP)Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS), Sorbonne Université and Institut pour la Recherche en Santé Publique (IReSP) The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
==== Body
pmcIntroduction

Dendritic spines are small protrusions distributed along the dendrites of neurons. Since each spine corresponds to a glutamatergic synapse, the density of spines located along the dendrite is a measure of the density of neuronal connectivity. Spine density measurement is thus pivotal for assessing connectivity changes during development, upon synaptic plasticity and learning, as well as in the context of psychiatric diseases ( Holtmaat and Svoboda, 2009; Penzes et al., 2011; Ma and Zuo, 2022; Heck and Santos, 2023). The morphology of dendritic spines, which are composed of a neck and a head, is another relevant parameter. The size of the head is tightly correlated with the size of the postsynapse density and synaptic current amplitude ( Noguchi et al., 2011; Holler et al., 2021). The length and width of the neck may have an influence on the integrative properties of the spine, since the neck represents a morphological constrains so the spine head is a functional compartment isolated for the dendritic shaft ( Adrian et al., 2014; Tonnesen and Nägerl, 2016; Cornejo et al., 2022). Therefore, quantification of spine density, spine head size and spine neck length are desirable for each of these parameters retrieve valuable information on neural connectivity, synapse efficacy and plasticity.

Dendritic spines however have a size that make them lay at the edge of resolution possibilities of photonic microscopy, hence detection and morphological analysis represent a challenge. Different strategies have been adopted in order to obtain reliable detection and segmentation of dendritic spines, reviewed in Mancuso et al. (2013) and Okabe (2020). Several algorithms have been developed, among which some have been implemented into softwares performing 3D spine detection and analysis. The first developed tools were 3DMA-neuron ( Koh et al., 2002) and NeuronIQ ( Cheng et al., 2007; Zhang et al., 2007). The widely used NeuronStudio ( Rodriguez et al., 2008) has been transferred to commercially available Neurolucida ( Dickstein et al., 2016). Another commercial software is Imaris Filament Tracer module ( Swanger et al., 2011; Benavides-Piccione et al., 2013). Other applications for spine detection and analysis from confocal microscopy images include Spiso3D ( Mukai et al., 2011), SpineLab ( Jungblut et al., 2012) and a tool included in the FARSIGHT project ( Yuan et al., 2009). More recent applications include 3dSpAn ( Das et al., 2022) and a spine detector plugin for the Vaa3D software ( Iascone et al., 2020), as well as tools dedicated to two-photon microscopy ( Singh et al., 2017; Rada et al., 2018; Argunşah et al., 2022; Vogel et al., 2023) and structured illumination microscopy ( Kashiwagi et al., 2019). Machine learning based method has also been developed to identify dendritic spines ( Blumer et al., 2015; Smirnov et al., 2018; Guerra et al., 2023), and deep learning approach was used to provide the automated spine segmentation softwares DeepSpineNet and DeepD3 ( Vidaurre-Gallart et al., 2022; Fernholz et al., 2024). Herein, we present an ImageJ plugin that allows spine detection, spine heads segmentation and spine necks tracing.

Methods

Animals

C57BL/6J male mice were maintained in a 12-hour light/12-hour dark cycle, under stable temperature (22°C) and humidity (60%) conditions with ad libitum access to food and water. All experiments were carried out in accordance with the standard ethical guidelines [European Community Council Directive on the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals (86/609/EEC) and the French National Committee (2010/63)].

Neuronal labeling

Fluorescent labeling of dendrites was obtained by diolistic method ( Heck et al., 2012). DiI (3 mg, ThermoFischer D282) is precipitated on the surface of 1.3 microns tungsten beads (50 mg, BioRad M-20). The coated beads are projected by helium gas pressure (150psi) through a 3 micron pore-size filter (Isopore polycarbonate, Millipore) on brain sections from animals perfused with 1.5% paraformaldehyde. The hydrophobic DiI molecule inserts into plasma membrane and passively diffuse along the dendrite, enabling a fluorescent membrane labeling that outlines neuronal morphology. After labeling, the sections were kept in phosphate buffer saline for 2 hours then mounted in Prolong Gold media (Molecular Probes, P36930).

Image acquisition and deconvolution

Confocal Laser Scanning Microscope (SP5, Leica) equipped with a 1.4 NA objective (oil immersion, Leica) was used to acquire image stacks with pixel size of 60 nm and z-step of 200 nm, at excitation wavelength of 561 nm and emission range 570-650 nm. Laser intensity was set so that each image occupies the full dynamic range of the detector (low noise Hybrid detector, Leica). Deconvolution with experimental PSF from 175 nm PS-speck Microscope Point Source fluorescent beads using Maximum Likelihood Estimation algorithm was performed with Huygens software (Scientific Volume Imaging). 150 iterations were applied in classical mode, background intensity was averaged from the voxels with lowest intensity, and signal to noise ratio values were set to a value of 20.

Implementation, features and usage

Our plugin Spot Spine uses our Spot Segmentation workflow ( Ollion et al., 2013; Heck et al., 2015) and the tracing algorithm from the plugin SNT ( Arshadi et al., 2021) to perform three-dimensional detection and analysis of dendritic spines in image stacks ( Figure 1). The algorithms are adapted to both isotropic and non isotropic voxels, since, typically, microscopy image stacks have lower axial resolution. Spot Spine is implemented as a plugin for ImageJ/FIJI (ImageJ 1.53, Schindelin et al., 2012a, 2012b). The plugin and instructions for use are available at https://imagej.net/plugins/spot-spine.

Figure 1. Flowchart of the Spot Spine plugin working process.

After an image stack is opened in FIJI/ImageJ and the plugin launched, the user is invited to set parameters for local maxima detection. The plugin imports the dendrite model encoded in a.swc file and compute the local maxima. The user can modify the parameters and manually edit each local maximum. Spine head segmentation is performed by the plugin, and the results can be updated by modifying segmentation parameters as well as manually editing each spine head. The spine necks are then traced, but for images in which the necks are not labeled, the plugin can draw straight lines. A result table is given, including spine head volumes, spine neck length, among other measurements.

Before proceeding, it first requires importing a reconstructed model of the dendrite in SWC format. The tracing of the dendrite, coded in a swc file, can be obtained with various freely available tools such as SNT ( Arshadi et al., 2021) or others ( Parekh and Ascoli, 2013; Liu et al., 2022). The dendrite model is automatically imported after launching the plugin. A dendrite coded as SWC is a sequence of connected nodes, thus our plugin applies a frustum between each sphere to improve the representation of the dendrite volume.

Spot Spine detects the dendritic spines by computing the local maxima in the neighbouring region of the dendrite. Since some local maxima can be false positives from the background, or spines from another dendrite located near the studied dendrite, the user is invited to define the three following parameters: intensity value underneath which local maxima are ignored, and minimum and maximum distance from the border of the dendrite model, delimiting around the dendrite a 3D region in which local maxima will be computed. The computed local maxima are listed and displayed in the image stack. A maximum projection of the stack is displayed as well, enabling to easily apprehend the content of the image stack ( Figure 2A). The user can then control further intensity and distance criteria to remove false positives. The minimal distance imposed between each local maxima can be reduced or expanded, enabling to adapt to either sparse or dense spine density along the dendrite. Moreover, full manual editing is easily achieved by removing single local maxima or adding local maxima by simply clicking in the image. The manual addition of local maxima is independent of the criteria of intensity and distance. It is noteworthy that the image stack and the maximum projection are synchronized. The user can thus interact on the maximum image projection for obvious cases of false positive and false negative, or in the image stack for better precision. When clicking in the maximum intensity projection, the location of the mouse in the image is recorded, and pixels contained in the region centered around the mouse coordinates are examined in each slice through the depth of the image stack. For spine deletion, the closest maximum is selected based on Nearest neighbor algorithm and deleted from the list. For spine addition, the coordinates of the voxel of highest intensity within a 5x5 region centered around the mouse location is added to the list.

Figure 2. Examples of images illustrating the main steps of the process.

A. Maximum intensity projection showing the detected local maxima. B. Maximum intensity projection showing the segmented spine heads. C. Maximum intensity projection showing traced necks and spine heads. D. 3D volume rendering of the dendrite encoded in swc file, segmented spine heads and traced necks.

Once the local maxima are found to correspond to each spine head, those are segmented in 3D using the spot segmentation workflow described in Gilles et al. (2017). Segmentation is run with set parameters that lead to consistent results with images obtained by confocal and two-photon microscopy from dendrites with membrane and cytosolic labeling, nevertheless, the user can update the segmentation after setting new values for the parameters. The segmented spine heads appear both on the synchronized image stack and maximum intensity projection ( Figure 2B). As described for the selection of local maxima, when clicking in the maximum projection, the object is selected by the analysis of the 3D content of the image stack within a region centered around the 2D coordinates of the mouse location. The user can select spine head that would need to be removed. It is possible to add new spine in case a spine head was not detected by a local maxima by clicking in the spine head. Two spine heads can also be selected to be merged. Indeed, each local maximum will give an object, hence if two local maxima are found in one large spine head, the best strategy is to keep both and thus generate two adjacent objects that can be merged.

In the third step, spine necks are traced using the SNT algorithm ( Figure 2C,D). The minimal euclidian distance between the spine head and the dendrite is computed to identify one voxel at the border of the spine head and one voxel at the border of the dendrite, and the optimal path between these two points is computed using SNT. After tracing, the neck is the one-voxel wide path from the voxel positioned at the edge of the spine head to the voxel preceding the first voxel positioned at the border of the dendrite. Manual editing is provided to delete wrong path and update the neck trace by imposing a new starting point at the border of the spine head. In the case of images in which the necks are not visible, the user can rather choose to obtain the minimal distance between the spine head center and the dendrite which is an estimate of spine length. For each case for which the spine head is in contact with the dendrite, no neck is traced and the spine is categorized as belonging to the stubby type.

After completion of spine detection, spine head segmentation and spine neck tracing, a four-channel image is displayed overlaying the original image, the dendrite coded in the SWC file, the segmented spine heads and the traces of the spine necks. A table is retrieved in which the measurements of several morphological parameters are given, including spine head volume and surface as well as neck length.

Discussion

We have implemented a new tool for 3D spine detection and analysis as an ImageJ/Fiji plugin. Of note, spine heads detection and segmentation works on 2D images as well, but not the tracing of the necks. To our knowledge, two other ImageJ plugins dedicated to dendritic spines exist: the Dendritic_Spine_Counter for 2D images, and SpineJ which is dedicated to 2D analysis of STED microscopy images ( Levet et al., 2020). Since full automatization is unattainable when considering the wide range of neuronal labeling and image acquisition protocols, manual editing in a user-friendly interface allows to correct spine detection and segmentation. However, most of the procedure remains automated, so spine head segmentation and spine neck tracing retrieve consistent results. One limitation of our plugin is that it does not give any estimate of the spine neck width. We have chosen to avoid the measurement of that parameter because it falls below the resolution of most confocal and two-photon image stacks. Studies specifically dedicated to the spine neck properties may better benefit from custom procedures for spine neck size estimates. An important concern is the signal to noise ratio of the image stacks. Local maxima detection is noise sensitive, hence noise filtering may help to avoid false positive. Deconvolution is generally recommended ( Dumitriu et al., 2011; Heck et al., 2012) since it improves axial resolution, but noise filtering using tools such as the plugin PureDenoise ( Luisier et al., 2010) can also yield good results.

Morphological analysis of dendritic spine is often based on classification into discreet categories, namely stubby, thin, mushroom and filopodia. Stubby spines are devoid of neck, which has functional implication since the neck isolates the spine head from the dendrite. Therefore, the plugin indicates in the result table if the spine is of stubby type. The categorization into thin and mushroom spines has however been shown to be arbitrary, since dendritic spines exhibit a continuum of morphologies ( Wilson et al., 1983; Tonnesen et al., 2014; Ofer et al., 2021, 2022). Filopodia are elongated spine without head which correspond to an immature stage observed during development. Nevertheless, it can be difficult to distinguish filopodia from long thin spines. Therefore, the distribution of unbiased measurement allows an objective assessment of spine morphology ( Pchitskaya and Bezprozvanny, 2020). Categorization of spines by cluster analysis of quantified features have been made ( Luengo-Sanchez et al., 2018; Urban et al., 2019; Kashiwagi et al., 2019). Recent softwares, Dxplorer ( Choi et al., 2023) and SpineTOOL ( Ekaterina et al., 2023), perform a fine analysis of spine morphology by analyzing either 3D surface mesh or chord lens distribution histogram, respectively. The quantitative results obtained with Spot Spine allow the description of the statistical distribution of morphological features, but the user can build categories by grouping dendritic spines according to defined range of values.

Acknowledgements

We thank the Imaging facility of the Institut de Biologie Paris Seine, where image acquisitions were performed. The IBPS Imaging facility is supported by Region-Île-de-France, Sorbonne-University and CNRS.

Data availability

No data are associated with this article.

Software availability

Software available from: https://imagej.net/plugins/spot-spine

Source code available from: https://github.com/JeffGilles/Spot-Spine/, https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10622975

License: GPL-3.0 - CeCILL

10.5256/f1000research.160403.r275153
Reviewer response for version 1
Aldridge Georgina M 1Referee
1 Iowa Neuroscience Institute, University of Iowa, Iowa City, USA
7 6 2024 Copyright: © 2024 Aldridge GM
2024
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licence, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Version 1recommendationapprove-with-reservations
The article itself is well written and described, but the software tool is currently difficult. I discuss the article first and the tool second. 

The article and tool are targeting an important need. Current tools are incredibly expensive and proprietary. Many in the field still use completely manual counting, which precludes unbiased evaluation of volume or shape. The tool description and the article are thus important. 

For the article, I do recommend the authors say spines are an "estimate" of synaptic number, rather than a "measure". 

Two other changes are just likely typos, my suggestion in brackets:

"since the neck represents a morphological constrains [ constraint], the spine head is a functional compartment isolated [ from] the dendritic shaft"

"Therefore, quantification of spine density, spine head size and spine neck length are desirable for

each of these parameters [in order to] retrieve valuable information on neural connectivity, synapse efficacy and plasticity."

For the tool:

The FAQ/about text for the tool has multiple typos and should be edited. I was not able to open any of my own 2-photon imaging data sets (despite having an associated SWC file that I made specifically to test this tool). Trying to open them immediately caused an error. The error was not specific so I am unclear what I was doing wrong.

I was able to open the sample images and tested the program on both a mac and PC running FIJI. The program did find spines in a reliable manner on this one sample image, and produced data that looked exciting and promising. However, as soon as any manual manipulation was attempted, there were difficulties:

1) Often (on both platforms) the manual edit stopped working. If the wrong button was touched in FIJI it led to two things occurring simultaneously. Restarting and not touching any buttons on FIJI (outside of spot spine) sometimes worked. 

2) The question mark button did not do anything

3) Green pixels shown on the max local projection are sometimes not seen on the max local merge file. 

4) deleting a spine made it so you could not add a spine back at the same location. Often trying to add a spine somewhere else would lead to error "needs a point". 

5) it was hard to tell when spines are selected- often leading to deleting multiple spines by mistake. There is no undo so this means starting over. Most mistakes I made led to needing to start over.

6) When getting into the spine neck path, clicking update caused the log to show errors. 

7) I could not tell which spines were which. I know from the FAQ they are coded by intensity but I could not find how to figure out which was which on the screen. This made it difficult to see how my manual edits were correlating with actual data output. 

8) Any amount of fussing to try to add or improve a spine manually led to bits of spine all over the dendrite that I couldn't figure out how to edit. 

Initially- the tool looked quite powerful and did map spines on the one sample image in a way that looked like it might be very useful. Unfortunately, all the manual editing caused disruptions, and this was in a perfect demo image.  If this is due to my own misreading of the instructions, then perhaps a video demonstrating manual editing of spines would help. As with all such tools, it is possible the particulars of my setup made using the tool more difficult, and others might find it more useful. Alternatively, the tool may just need a bit more refinement to be user-ready.

Are the conclusions about the tool and its performance adequately supported by the findings presented in the article?

No

Is the rationale for developing the new software tool clearly explained?

Yes

Is the description of the software tool technically sound?

Yes

Are sufficient details of the code, methods and analysis (if applicable) provided to allow replication of the software development and its use by others?

Yes

Is sufficient information provided to allow interpretation of the expected output datasets and any results generated using the tool?

Yes

Reviewer Expertise:

I have >15 years experience counting dendritic spines. I use FIJI relatively frequently, including to count spines and I am familiar with installing and using plugins, but I am not myself familiar with building/coding plugins.

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above.

Heck Nicolas Neuroscience Paris Seine, Sorbonne Universite, Paris, Île-de-France, France

30 8 2024 The article itself is well written and described, but the software tool is currently difficult. I discuss the article first and the tool second. 

The article and tool are targeting an important need. Current tools are incredibly expensive and proprietary. Many in the field still use completely manual counting, which precludes unbiased evaluation of volume or shape. The tool description and the article are thus important. 

For the article, I do recommend the authors say spines are an "estimate" of synaptic number, rather than a "measure".

Response: We agree, modifications have been done in the manuscript.

Two other changes are just likely typos, my suggestion in brackets:

"since the neck represents a morphological constrains [ constraint], the spine head is a functional compartment isolated [ from] the dendritic shaft"

"Therefore, quantification of spine density, spine head size and spine neck length are desirable for

each of these parameters [in order to] retrieve valuable information on neural connectivity, synapse efficacy and plasticity."

Response: Thank you, the manuscript has been corrected.

For the tool:

The FAQ/about text for the tool has multiple typos and should be edited.

Response: Thank you for pointing that out, we will correct the webpage

I was not able to open any of my own 2-photon imaging data sets (despite having an associated SWC file that I made specifically to test this tool). Trying to open them immediately caused an error. The error was not specific so I am unclear what I was doing wrong.

Response: Opening images files is completely independent of our plugin. Opening images is integral part of FIJI/ImageJ. For proprietary files such as .lif or .czi coming from commercial microscopes, the plugin LOCI Importer is needed, however the plugin is by default included in FIJI. In any case, our plugin starts after an image has been opened so the problem is unrelated to our plugin.

Or you mean that after the image was open, you could not run spot spine. It could come from the swc file. Some swc contain the xyz coordinates and the diameter of spheres along the dendrite. Some swc contain only the xyz coordinates thus coding a line. When you tested our plugin, it was not able to work with swc without diameter estimation of the dendr ite. We have updated the plugin so both type of swc file are compatible.

I was able to open the sample images and tested the program on both a mac and PC running FIJI. The program did find spines in a reliable manner on this one sample image, and produced data that looked exciting and promising. However, as soon as any manual manipulation was attempted, there were difficulties:

1) Often (on both platforms) the manual edit stopped working. If the wrong button was touched in FIJI it led to two things occurring simultaneously. Restarting and not touching any buttons on FIJI (outside of spot spine) sometimes worked.

Response: The other reviewer and some colleagues did not report similar problems. It may be related to the ImageJ or FIJI version used, or to the version of the plugins 3DImageSuite or SNT installed. A more detailed description of the problem is required to fully respond about the problem mentionned here. For our previously published plugin DiAna, as well as for Spot Spine, our email adress is on the webpage of the plugin and in the publication. We keep answering to all request and help users. In addition, we answer to questions posted on the widely used FIJI/ImageJ oriented « scientific community image forum » : https://forum.image.sc.

2) The question mark button did not do anything

Response: Thank you for pointing that out. We updated the plugin so the question mark drives the user to the spot spine webpage. The question mark at the segmentation step drives the user to the webpage describing the segmentation method.

3) Green pixels shown on the max local projection are sometimes not seen on the max local merge file.

Response: Unfortunately, green pixels can be difficult to see depending on the local intensity in the other channel. Any plugin can only use the look-up tables and image display internally coded in FIJI/ImageJ. In the plugin, it is offered to have the image in either blue or gray levels. Nevertheless, the user can go to Image>Look-up tables and apply any of those while running the plugin. In some cases, changing brightness&contrast will help as well (Image>Adjust>Brightness&Contrast)

4) deleting a spine made it so you could not add a spine back at the same location. Often trying to add a spine somewhere else would lead to error "needs a point". 

Response:In an earlier version of the plugin, it was not possible to add a spine in a head that was previously deleted. We have updated the plugin so it is know possible.

The message « needs a point » indicates that it is first required to define a region of interest before clicking on the « Add » button. As written in the dialog window, the user holds the SHIFT key and click in the image. Then a region of interest appears (as a square selection), and then clicking on « Add » button will prompt the plugin to find a local maxima within the region, and segment the object.

5) it was hard to tell when spines are selected- often leading to deleting multiple spines by mistake. There is no undo so this means starting over. Most mistakes I made led to needing to start over.

Response: Undo function is not build in FIJI/ImageJ, it is a known limitations of the program which is not in our hands. Also build in FIJI/ImageJ, selection is shown as yellow line around the selected objet. It is true that once selecting a spine head, to select another will not unselect the previously selected one. The simple reason is that is allows to merge objects when two objects are found in one single spine head (a needed function since in some large spine heads, more than one local maximum can be found, hence the merge function allows to overcome oversegmentation). Once the merge is performed, no spine head is selected.

To unsure no objects are selected, the user can click outside of a spine head. This will by default unselect all selected spines. It is a build in function of FIJI/ImageJ, that when clicking outside a selection or an object, a « select none » function is applied.

6) When getting into the spine neck path, clicking update caused the log to show errors.

Response: It is difficult to respond without knowing the content of the error message. For our previously published plugin DiAna, as well as for Spot Spine, our email adress is on the webpage of the plugin and in the publication. We keep answering to all request and help users. In addition, we answer to questions posted on the widely used FIJI/ImageJ oriented « scientific community image forum » : https://forum.image.sc.

Concerning updating the necks. First delete a neck by clicking on (or near) the head or the neck and then click on « delete path ». Then click again in head while holding SHIFT key, a yellow dot appears. Then click on « Update path ». A new path starting from the dot will be created. Please note that the algorithm computes best path it can detect, so the new path may be same as first. Neck detection is very challenging because intensity of the neck in the image is usually very low. Anytime delete or update path function is applied, the results Table is updated.

7) I could not tell which spines were which. I know from the FAQ they are coded by intensity but I could not find how to figure out which was which on the screen. This made it difficult to see how my manual edits were correlating with actual data output.

Response: We acknowledge this would help, but annotation on the output image is not straightforward. If in the image stack, it would be visible only in one plane ; if on the maximum projection numbers would overlap if spines are close to each other.

Nonetheless, the user has several options because the ID of the spine in the table is color coded in the image. For a spine with ID 25, the voxels in the image will have an intensity of 250. Therefore :

The user can point on the spine in the image and read the intensity (= the ID) in the FIJI/ImageJ menu window. Since the image is a composite with four channels, the user needs to select the spine head channel (i.e. first channel) otherwise the intensity given may be 0 (in necks and dendrite channels) or a number which is the gray level of the orignial image (fourth channel). To select a channel see the « C » sliding bar at the bottom of the image.

The user can read an ID in the table and find it by checking the intensities of the spines in the image. The ID numbers increase with stack depth.

Another way is to use the 3DManager of the plugin 3DImageSuite (that plugin is necessarily installed for the proper functioning of Spot spine). In short, the steps to follow are : Go to plugin menu, 3DSuite, 3DManager. Once the manager is open, click on the composite image containing the spine heads, necks, dendrite and image to activate. Choose the spine head channel (i.e. first channel). In the 3DManager, click on « Add Image ». All objects will be listed in the manager. Names are obj1-val10 ; obj2-val20 ; obj3-val30 and so on. ObjX is same as in « Name » column of the Result Table. ValX is the same as the spine head intensity in the image. Click on « Live ROI ». Click on one ROI in the list to make it encircled in yellow in the image stack.

8) Any amount of fussing to try to add or improve a spine manually led to bits of spine all over the dendrite that I couldn't figure out how to edit. 

Response: It is difficult to respond without seeing an image on which the phenomenon you described appears. Again, for our previously published plugin DiAna, as well as for Spot Spine, our email adress is on the webpage of the plugin and in the publication. We keep answering to all request and help users. In addition, we answer to questions posted on the widely used FIJI/ImageJ oriented « scientific community image forum » : https://forum.image.sc.

10.5256/f1000research.160403.r275149
Reviewer response for version 1
Zhou Jiang-Ning 1Referee https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1225-2873

Shan Qing-Hong 1Co-referee
1 Institute of Brain Science, The First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University, Hefei, Anhui, China
22 5 2024 Copyright: © 2024 Zhou JN and Shan QH
2024
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licence, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Version 1recommendationapprove
The authors of this article present a plugin specifically designed for three-dimensional spine analysis on the ImageJ platform. They provide detailed explanations of the underlying principles and usage procedures of the plugin, and compare it with other software for 2D or 3D dendritic spine analysis, such as Dendritic_Spine_Counter, SpineJ, Dxplorer, and SpineTOOL. The article is user-friendly and provides comprehensive details to comprehend the described methods and their practical application. Following the authors' meticulous instructions, we effortlessly installed and utilized the plugin. The manuscript fulfills expectations for a software paper; however, while reading the paper and using the software, some minor suggestions and questions have emerged.

1. In the "Introduction" section, the authors present various software and methods for spine analysis; however, they fail to provide a clear rationale behind the development of the Spot Spine Plugin, despite the existence of numerous available techniques. Please provide a brief introduction here regarding the purpose and significance of developing this plugin.

2. On the interface for selecting spine detection parameters, in order to enhance users' comprehension of parameter definitions, could you please specify the units for "Minimum distance to dendrite" and "Maximum distance to dendrite" (in pixels or microns)?

3. The "Result Table" generated by the plugin presents a wide range of parameters; however, it has come to my attention that the commonly utilized parameter of dendritic spine density is conspicuously absent. It is strongly recommended to incorporate statistical data for this particular parameter.

4. The statistical parameters include the identification (ID) of each identified spine; however, the corresponding ID is not annotated on the output images, which poses challenges for traceability. It is recommended to incorporate ID markers in the output images to facilitate referencing.

5. The statistical analysis of dendritic spines often necessitates the processing of a large number of dendrites, and batch analysis proves to be highly efficient in this regard. It has been observed that Spot Spine lacks a batch analysis feature, thus it is recommended to incorporate this functionality into the plugin.

6. The article utilizes the analysis of spines on a single dendrite as an illustrative example. It would be beneficial to provide clarification and discussion regarding the applicability of the plugin to dendrites with multiple branches.

Are the conclusions about the tool and its performance adequately supported by the findings presented in the article?

Yes

Is the rationale for developing the new software tool clearly explained?

Partly

Is the description of the software tool technically sound?

Yes

Are sufficient details of the code, methods and analysis (if applicable) provided to allow replication of the software development and its use by others?

Yes

Is sufficient information provided to allow interpretation of the expected output datasets and any results generated using the tool?

Yes

Reviewer Expertise:

neuroscience

We confirm that we have read this submission and believe that we have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard.

Heck Nicolas Neuroscience Paris Seine, Sorbonne Universite, Paris, Île-de-France, France

30 8 2024 The authors of this article present a plugin specifically designed for three-dimensional spine analysis on the ImageJ platform. They provide detailed explanations of the underlying principles and usage procedures of the plugin, and compare it with other software for 2D or 3D dendritic spine analysis, such as Dendritic_Spine_Counter, SpineJ, Dxplorer, and SpineTOOL. The article is user-friendly and provides comprehensive details to comprehend the described methods and their practical application. Following the authors' meticulous instructions, we effortlessly installed and utilized the plugin. The manuscript fulfills expectations for a software paper; however, while reading the paper and using the software, some minor suggestions and questions have emerged.

1. In the "Introduction" section, the authors present various software and methods for spine analysis; however, they fail to provide a clear rationale behind the development of the Spot Spine Plugin, despite the existence of numerous available techniques. Please provide a brief introduction here regarding the purpose and significance of developing this plugin.

Response: We have updated the introduction to better explain the rationale for proposing Spot Spine.

« Whilst several tools are available, the general usage of one software for all labeling methods and all image acquisition conditions is unattainable ideal. Hence, our new plugin may be better adapted as compared to others for some users. Spot spine allows precise 3D detection and segmentation of spine heads even in case of high spine density. The automated segmentation ensures reliable and comparable results for shape descriptors of spine head, which are relevant physiological parameters. Furthermore, manual editing at each step of the process ensures that false negative and positive are absent. »

2. On the interface for selecting spine detection parameters, in order to enhance users' comprehension of parameter definitions, could you please specify the units for "Minimum distance to dendrite" and "Maximum distance to dendrite" (in pixels or microns)?

Response:Thank you for that suggestion. We updated the plugin so that information appears.

3. The "Result Table" generated by the plugin presents a wide range of parameters; however, it has come to my attention that the commonly utilized parameter of dendritic spine density is conspicuously absent. It is strongly recommended to incorporate statistical data for this particular parameter.

Response:The Result Table gives information on each spine, but spine density is obviously essential information. It actually was in the plugin, but your commentary made us realize that the code was missing in the version uploaded on the webpage. The plugin has now been updated so at the end of the process (after clicking « finish »), the following informations appears in the Log window : image file name, dendrite length ; total number of spines ; number of spines with neck ; number of stubby spines ; total spine density for 10micron of dendritic length ; spine with neck density for 10micron of dendritic length ; stubby spine density for 10micron of dendritic length. Since it was not mentionned in the manuscript, we added the following sentence is the results section : « Dendrite length, number of spines and spine density is given in a log window ».

4. The statistical parameters include the identification (ID) of each identified spine; however, the corresponding ID is not annotated on the output images, which poses challenges for traceability. It is recommended to incorporate ID markers in the output images to facilitate referencing.

Response: We acknowledge this would help, but annotation on the output image is not straightforward. If in the image stack, it would be visible only in one plane ; if on the maximum projection numbers would overlap if spines are close to each other.

Nonetheless, the user has several options because the ID of the spine in the table is color coded in the image. For a spine with ID 25, the voxels in the image will have an intensity of 250. Therefore :

The user can point on the spine in the image and read the intensity (= the ID) in the FIJI/ImageJ menu window. Since the image is a composite with four channels, the user needs to select the spine head channel (i.e. first channel) otherwise the intensity given may be 0 (in necks and dendrite channels) or a number which is the gray level of the orignial image (fourth channel). To select a channel see the « C » sliding bar at the bottom of the image.

The user can read an ID in the table and find it by checking the intensities of the spines in the image. The ID numbers increase with stack depth.

Another way is to use the 3DManager of the plugin 3DImageSuite (that plugin is necessarily installed for the proper functioning of Spot spine). In short, the steps to follow are : Go to plugin menu, 3DSuite, 3DManager. Once the manager is open, click on the composite image containing the spine heads, necks, dendrite and image to activate. Choose the spine head channel (i.e. first channel). In the 3DManager, click on « Add Image ». All objects will be listed in the manager. Names are obj1-val10 ; obj2-val20 ; obj3-val30 and so on. ObjX is same as in « Name » column of the Result Table. ValX is the same as the spine head intensity in the image. Click on « Live ROI ». Click on one ROI in the list to make it encircled in yellow in the image stack.

5. The statistical analysis of dendritic spines often necessitates the processing of a large number of dendrites, and batch analysis proves to be highly efficient in this regard. It has been observed that Spot Spine lacks a batch analysis feature, thus it is recommended to incorporate this functionality into the plugin.

Response: In nearly all cases, a fully automated procedure would bring false positives and false negatives. Hence we made the choice to design a tool that allows manual editing at each step of the process. Therefore a batch mode would not be of much help. Nevertheless, if several users would contact us for expressing that need, it could be implemented.

6. The article utilizes the analysis of spines on a single dendrite as an illustrative example. It would be beneficial to provide clarification and discussion regarding the applicability of the plugin to dendrites with multiple branches.

Response: If the swc file encode a dendrite splitting in two branches (or more), the plugin will detect spines all along the dendrite. In principle, the plugin could be used to detect spines on a complete dendritic tree if the image has the sufficient resolution. However, the purpose of the plugin not to analyse dendritic tree morphology, hence the spine density will not be given for each branch, but as one value for a total dendrite length.

Competing interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

Competing interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

Competing interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

Competing interests: No competing interests were disclosed.
==== Refs
References

Adrian M Kusters R Wierenga CJ : Barriers in the brain: resolving dendritic spine morphology and compartmentalization. Front. Neuroanat. 2014;8 :142. 10.3389/fnana.2014.00142 25538570
Argunşah AÖ Erdil E Ghani MU : An interactive time series image analysis software for dendritic spines. Sci. Rep. 2022;12 (1 ):12405. 10.1038/s41598-022-16137-y 35859092
Arshadi C Günther U Eddison M : SNT: a unifying toolbox for quantification of neuronal anatomy. Nat. Methods. 2021;18 (4 ):374–377. 10.1038/s41592-021-01105-7 33795878
Benavides-Piccione R Fernaud-Espinosa I Robles V : Age-based comparison of human dendritic spine structure using complete three-dimensional reconstructions. Cereb. Cortex. 2013;23 (8 ):1798–1810. 10.1093/cercor/bhs154 22710613
Blumer C Vivien C Genoud C : Automated analysis of spine dynamics on live CA1 pyramidal cells. Med. Image Anal. 2015;19 (1 ):87–97. 10.1016/j.media.2014.09.004 25299432
Cheng J Zhou X Miller E : A novel computational approach for automatic dendrite spines detection in two-photon laser scan microscopy. J. Neurosci. Methods. 2007;165 :122–134. 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2007.05.020 17629570
Choi J Lee SE Lee Y : DXplorer: a unified visualization framework for interactive dendritic spine analysis using 3D morphological features. IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. 2023;29 (2 ):1424–1437. 10.1109/TVCG.2021.3116656 34591770
Cornejo VH Ofer N Yuste R : Voltage compartmentalization in dendritic spines in vivo. Science. 2022;375 (6576 ):82–86. 10.1126/science.abg0501 34762487
Das N Baczynska E Bijata M : 3dSpAn: An interactive software for 3D segmentation and analysis of dendritic spines. Neuroinformatics. 2022;20 (3 ):679–698. 10.1007/s12021-021-09549-0 34743262
Dickstein DL Dickstein DR Janssen WGM : Automatic dendritic spine quantification from confocal data with Neurolucida 360. Curr. Protoc. Neurosci. 2016;77 :1.27.1–1.27.21. 10.1002/cpns.16 27696360
Dumitriu D Rodriguez A Morrison JH : High-throughput, detailed, cell-specific neuroanatomy of dendritic spines using microinjection and confocal microscopy. Nat. Protoc. 2011;6 (9 ):1391–1411. 10.1038/nprot.2011.389 21886104
Ekaterina P Peter V Smirnova D : SpineTool is an open-source software for analysis of morphology of dendritic spines. Sci. Rep. 2023;13 (1 ):10561.37386071
Fernholz MHP Guggiana Nilo DA Bonhoeffer T : DeepD3, an open framework for automated quantification of dendritic spines. PLoS Comput Biol. 2024;20 (2 ): e1011774. 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1011774 38422112
Gilles JF Dos Santos M Boudier T : DiAna, an ImageJ tool for object-based 3D co-localization and distance analysis. Methods. 2017;115 :55–64. 10.1016/j.ymeth.2016.11.016 27890650
Guerra KTK Renner J Vásquez CE : Human cortical amygdala dendrites and spines morphology under open-source three-dimensional reconstruction procedures. J. Comp. Neurol. 2023;531 (3 ):344–365. 10.1002/cne.25430 36355397
Heck N Betuing S Vanhoutte P : A deconvolution method to improve automated 3D-analysis of dendritic spines: application to a mouse model of Huntington’s disease. Brain Struct. Funct. 2012;217 (2 ):421–434. 10.1007/s00429-011-0340-y 21822732
Heck N Dos Santos M Amairi B : A new automated 3D detection of synaptic contacts reveals the formation of cortico-striatal synapses upon cocaine treatment in vivo. Brain Struct. Funct. 2015;220 (5 ):2953–2966. 10.1007/s00429-014-0837-2 25001083
Heck N Santos MD : Dendritic spines in learning and memory: From first discoveries to current insights. Adv. Neurobiol. 2023;34 :311–348. 10.1007/978-3-031-36159-3_7 37962799
Holler S Köstinger G Martin KAC : Structure and function of a neocortical synapse. Nature. 2021;591 (7848 ):111–116. 10.1038/s41586-020-03134-2 33442056
Holtmaat A Svoboda K : Experience-dependent structural synaptic plasticity in the mammalian brain. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 2009;10 (9 ):647–658. 10.1038/nrn2699 19693029
Iascone DM Li Y Sümbül U : Whole-neuron synaptic mapping reveals spatially precise excitatory/inhibitory balance limiting dendritic and somatic spiking. Neuron. 2020;106 (4 ):566–578.e8. 10.1016/j.neuron.2020.02.015 32169170
Jungblut D Vlachos A Schuldt G : SpineLab: tool for three-dimensional reconstruction of neuronal cell morphology. J. Biomed. Opt. 2012;17 (7 ):076007. 10.1117/1.JBO.17.7.076007 22894490
Kashiwagi Y Higashi T Obashi K : Computational geometry analysis of dendritic spines by structured illumination microscopy. Nat. Commun. 2019;10 (1 ):1285. 10.1038/s41467-019-09337-0 30894537
Koh IY Lindquist WB Zito K : An image analysis algorithm for dendritic spines. Neural Comput. 2002;14 (6 ):1283–1310. 10.1162/089976602753712945 12020447
Levet F Tønnesen J Nägerl UV : SpineJ: A software tool for quantitative analysis of nanoscale spine morphology. Methods. 2020;174 :49–55. 10.1016/j.ymeth.2020.01.020 32006677
Liu Y Wang G Ascoli GA : Neuron tracing from light microscopy images: automation, deep learning and bench testing. Bioinformatics. 2022;38 (24 ):5329–5339. 10.1093/bioinformatics/btac712 36303315
Luengo-Sanchez S Fernaud-Espinosa I Bielza C : 3D morphology-based clustering and simulation of human pyramidal cell dendritic spines. PLoS Comput. Biol. 2018;14 (6 ):e1006221. 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1006221 29897896
Luisier F Vonesch C Blu T : Fast interscale wavelet denoising of poisson-corrupted images. Signal Process. 2010;90 (2 ):415–427. 10.1016/j.sigpro.2009.07.009
Ma S Zuo Y : Synaptic modifications in learning and memory - A dendritic spine story. Semin. Cell Dev. Biol. 2022;125 :84–90. 10.1016/j.semcdb.2021.05.015 34020876
Mancuso JJ Chen Y Li X : Methods of dendritic spine detection: from Golgi to high-resolution optical imaging. Neuroscience. 2013;251 :129–140. 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2012.04.010 22522468
Mukai H Hatanaka Y Mitsuhashi K : Automated analysis of spines from confocal laser microscopy images: application to the discrimination of androgen and estrogen effects on spinogenesis. Cereb. Cortex. 2011;21 (12 ):2704–2711. 10.1093/cercor/bhr059 21527787
Noguchi J Nagaoka A Watanabe S : In vivo two-photon uncaging of glutamate revealing the structure-function relationships of dendritic spines in the neocortex of adult mice. J. Physiol. 2011;589 (Pt 10 ):2447–2457. 10.1113/jphysiol.2011.207100 21486811
Ofer N Benavides-Piccione R DeFelipe J : Structural analysis of human and mouse dendritic spines reveals a morphological continuum and differences across ages and species. Eneuro. 2022;9 (3 ):ENEURO.0039-22.2022. 10.1523/ENEURO.0039-22.2022
Ofer N Berger DR Kasthuri N : Ultrastructural analysis of dendritic spine necks reveals a continuum of spine morphologies. Dev. Neurobiol. 2021;81 (5 ):746–757. 10.1002/dneu.22829 33977655
Okabe S : Recent advances in computational methods for measurement of dendritic spines imaged by light microscopy. Microscopy. 2020;69 (4 ):196–213. 10.1093/jmicro/dfaa016 32244257
Ollion J Cochennec J Loll F : TANGO: a generic tool for high-throughput 3D image analysis for studying nuclear organization. Bioinformatics. 2013;29 (14 ):1840–1841. 10.1093/bioinformatics/btt276 23681123
Parekh R Ascoli GA : Neuronal morphology goes digital: a research hub for cellular and system neuroscience. Neuron. 2013;77 (6 ):1017–1038. 10.1016/j.neuron.2013.03.008 23522039
Pchitskaya E Bezprozvanny I : Dendritic spines shape analysis-classification or clusterization? Perspective. Front. Synaptic. Neurosci. 2020;12 :31. 10.3389/fnsyn.2020.00031 33117142
Penzes P Cahill ME Jones KA : Dendritic spine pathology in neuropsychiatric disorders. Nat. Neurosci. 2011;14 (3 ):285–293. 10.1038/nn.2741 21346746
Rada L Kilic B Erdil E : Tracking-assisted detection of dendritic dpines in time-Lapse microscopic images. Neuroscience. 2018;394 :189–205. 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2018.10.022 30347279
Rodriguez A Ehlenberger DB Dickstein DL : Automated three-dimensional detection and shape classification of dendritic spines from fluorescence microscopy images. PLoS One. 2008;3 :e1997. 10.1371/journal.pone.0001997 18431482
Schindelin J Arganda-Carreras I Frise E : Fiji: an open-source platform for biological-image analysis. Nat. Methods. 2012a;9 (7 ):676–682. 10.1038/nmeth.2019 22743772
Schneider CA Rasband WS Eliceiri KW : NIH Image to ImageJ: 25 years of image analysis. Nat. Methods. 2012b;9 (7 ):671–675. 10.1038/nmeth.2089 22930834
Singh PK Hernandez-Herrera P Labate D : Automated 3-D detection of dendritic spines from in vivo two-photon image stacks. Neuroinformatics. 2017;15 (4 ):303–319. 10.1007/s12021-017-9332-2 28710672
Smirnov MS Garrett TR Yasuda R : An open-source tool for analysis and automatic identification of dendritic spines using machine learning. PLoS One. 2018;13 (7 ):e0199589. 10.1371/journal.pone.0199589 29975722
Swanger SA Yao X Gross C : Automated 4D analysis of dendritic spine morphology: applications to stimulus-induced spine remodeling and pharmacological rescue in a disease model. Mol. Brain. 2011;4 :38. 10.1186/1756-6606-4-38 21982080
Tonnesen J Katona G Rózsa B : Spine neck plasticity regulates compartmentalization of synapses. Nat. Neurosci. 2014;17 (5 ):678–685. 10.1038/nn.3682 24657968
Tonnesen J Nägerl UV : Dendritic spines as tunable regulators of synaptic signals. Front. Psych. 2016;7 :101. 10.3389/fpsyt.2016.00101 27340393
Urban P Rezaei V Bokota G : Dendritic spines taxonomy: the functional and structural classification time-dependent probabilistic model of neuronal activation. J. Comput. Biol. 2019;26 (4 ):322–335. 10.1089/cmb.2018.0155 30810368
Vidaurre-Gallart I Fernaud-Espinosa I Cosmin-Toader N : A deep learning-based workflow for dendritic spine segmentation. Front. Neuroanat. 2022;16 :817903. 10.3389/fnana.2022.817903 35370569
Vogel FW Alipek S Eppler JB : Utilizing 2D-region-based CNNs for automatic dendritic spine detection in 3D live cell imaging. Sci. Rep. 2023;13 (1 ):20497. 10.1038/s41598-023-47070-3 37993550
Wilson CJ Groves PM Kitai ST : Three-dimensional structure of dendritic spines in the rat neostriatum. J. Neurosci. 1983;3 (2 ):383–388. 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.03-02-00383.1983 6822869
Yuan X Trachtenberg JT Potter SM : MDL constrained 3-D grayscale skeletonization algorithm for automated extraction of dendrites and spines from fluorescence confocal images. Neuroinformatics. 2009;7 (4 ):213–232. 10.1007/s12021-009-9057-y 20012509
Zhang Y Zhou X Witt RM : Dendritic spine detection using curvilinear structure detector and LDA classifier. NeuroImage. 2007;36 :346–360. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2007.02.044 17448688
